When Children Refuse Medical Treatment: Role of Government and Assessments; a Standardized Test to Assess a Child's Maturity and Understanding Would Help Judges in Their Solomonic Roles to Render More Uniform Decisions
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
A standardized test to assess a child's maturity and understanding would help judges in their Solomonic roles to render more uniform decisions THE ROLE and responsibility of government and a child's maturity level and understanding of medical were two issues raised in three Canadian cases decided in the 1990s-Walker (Litigation Guardian of) v. Region 2 Hospital Corp.,1 Re Dueck,2 and Re Y (A.).3 These concerns are relevant to the most significant issue of how to protect children while respecting their wishes when they refuse medical treatment. Evident in these cases is the lack of consistency in determining whether a child reasonably the grave consequences of not receiving medical for a terminal illness. A standardized test such as a mandatory psychological analysis or evaluation would provide a consistent method for courts to determine a child's maturity level and understanding of the consequences of rejecting medical treatment. Such a refinement would clarify the jurisdiction of parens patriae and help government to establish more firmly its role in dealing with children who refuse medical treatment. INFORMED CONSENT A. Significance In general, consent refers to an agreement given freely by one individual or entity to another. In a medical setting, consent is qualified by the word informed. Before medical practitioners can treat a patient, they must provide that individual with information about the nature of the medical procedure and any risks inherent in it. A doctor's failure to disclose this information to a patient can vitiate the patient's consent to receive and opens the door to a world of problems for the provider. Without valid permission from a patient, any type of direct contact by a doctor to a patient could result in a tort action of battery or in a criminal charge of assault.4 Thus, informed consent can have an enormous impact on the entire medical community. Patients who provide informed consent for medical must be competent; they must be able to understand the nature and consequences of and be of reasoning a decision. A mentally competent patient also can refuse medical even if the is necessary for survival. A doctor may not agree with a patient's decision to reject medical attention, but as long as the person is of making that decision, the doctor must respect it. B. Children The specific age for a person to enjoy certain rights as an adult varies throughout the Canadian provinces depending on the provisions of particular legislation. New Brunswick's legislation permits a minor rather than an adult guardian to consent to medical treatment. The Medical Consent of Minors Act provides that any child under 16 years of age who is capable of understanding the nature and consequences of a medical treatment can provide consent for the administration of medical treatment.5 British Columbia has a similar provision stating that a child who understands the nature and consequences and the reasonably foreseeable benefits and risks of healthcare can consent to treatment.6 These statutes concur with the Canadian common law doctrine that any child who is mature and the nature of medical procedure can consent to such treatment.7 MATURITY AND UNDERSTANDING These statutes, common law doctrine and various literature concerning a child's ability to consent to medical all focus on the same question: Is the child mature and able to understand the nature of the and the consequences of refusing it? This question was significant in the cited cases, which were decided by courts in Saskatchewan, British Columbia, New Brunswick, and Newfoundland. A. Dueck - Saskatchewan Re Dueck concerned a 13-year-old boy named Tyrell who endured chemotherapy to treat cancer. Toward the end of the treatment, Tyrell stated that he neither wanted to undergo any further chemotherapy treatment, nor have surgery on his leg. …
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle